作者：毛灵见

2016-12-28

摘要：商业秘密作为企业的一项重要无形资产，由技术信息和经营信息构成且不同于秘密信息，企业需结合商业秘密的秘密性、价值性、保密性的三个构成要件予认定和识别。企业的商业秘密防护机制应遵循在法律层面为基准进行设置，商业秘密内容的不可公开性并不妨碍企业对商业秘密作为一项权利的可宣示性，企业可在商业秘密权利宣示的基础上根据不同的侵犯商业秘密的可能主体有针对性进行相应的的防护机制设置以实现企业商业秘密的有效保护。

关键词： 商业秘密  识别  权利宣示 防护机制

商业秘密作为企业的一项重要无形资产，具有巨大的经济价值和竞争性价值[1]。目前多数家国及相关国际组织都已逐渐确立了从法律层面对商业秘密进行保护[2]，甚至赋予其作为知识产权这样一种对世权的强硬保护[3]，但由于相关立法的相对抽象原则以及商业秘密本身的秘密性特点，加上大多国内企业经营者对商业秘密保护意识也较为淡薄，许多企业经营者面对商业秘密被侵犯而丧失竞争优势却又举手无措的情形并不鲜见。

因此，本文试图从以商业秘密的本体论为起点来对企业内部的各式信息进行商业秘密识别，进而试图探索一条有效防护企业商业秘密的路径，以求对企业经营者在管理商业秘密这一重要资产的过程中而有所助益。

一、商业秘密的识别

商业秘密不像专利、商标、著作权等其他企业无形资产可经由国家公权力的确认予明确公示，商业秘密的隐秘特性只能要求其拥有者对可能的商业秘密信息进行内部的自我判断，而且商业秘密若受到侵犯而要寻求司法保护的话，往往也伴随着先就商业秘密本身的权利形态进行个案的确认。因此，企业若要对商业秘密进行有效地保护，就首先要求企业自身对何为“商业秘密“本身得能够有一个清晰的认知，进而辨识哪些信息是属于商业秘密的范畴。

（一）商业秘密概念的界定

我国对于商业秘密相关规定主要见于《反不正当竞争法》第十条第三款规定，即：“商业秘密是指不为公众所知悉、能为权利人带来经济利益、具有实用性并经权利人采取保密措施的技术信息和经营信息。” Trips协议第39条对商业秘密（未披露过的信息）[4]也做了相应的界定，但并没有明确给出商业秘密的概念，它只指出了商业秘密（未披露信息）其应当具备秘密性、商业价值及采取保密措施（保密性或管理性）三个构成要件[5]，并明确了商业秘密主体及客体。

相对于trips协议对“未披露信息”的规定，《反不正当竞争法》对于商业秘密的界定还要求信息需具备具有实用性这一必要特征，其余基本与trips协议的规定一致。不过理论界和实务界现已普遍认为，商业秘密的实用性已涵括于价值性这一要件之中或者说可为商业价值性这一要件所吸纳[6]。最高院2007年颁布的《关于审理反不正当竞争纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释》（以下简称“《反不正当竞争法解释》”）已将“有关信息具有现实的或者潜在的商业价值，能为权利人带来竞争优势的”即认定为《反不正当竞争法》第十条第三款规定的“能为权利人带来经济利益、具有实用性”，由此可知，司法实践中也已事实上淡化了“实用性”对于商业秘密认定的构件要求。因此，我们在对商业秘密进行认定时，无需再对商业秘密的“实用性”进行专门的考量，而只需对“技术信息”和“经营信息”是否具备秘密性、价值性及保密性进行判断。

（二）商业秘密的具体认定

1、关于秘密性——不为公众所知悉的认定

不为公众所知悉是进行商业秘密认定的前提，是商业秘密区别于专利、商标、作品等其他知识产权客体的最根本属性。商业秘密一旦丧失秘密性成为公知信息，其也就失去了作为商业秘密保护的基础。《反不正当竞争法解释》第9条第1款规定：“有关信息不为其所属领域的相关人员普遍知悉和容易获得，应当认定为反不正当竞争法第十条第三款规定的‘不为公众所知悉’”。秘密性是一种客观的状态，是商业秘密成立在成立时即作为一种不为“普遍知悉和容易获得”的信息形态。但这里的秘密性是相对的，只要该信息在其所在领域或者行业内不被公知、不被普遍地知悉、了解，信息的价值就得以永续，在此限度的秘密性就足以维持信息自身的价值。[7]

秘密性虽是作为一种客观状态而存在，但若要转化具有法律意义上客观状态，必然要由相应的主体进行判断，就这产生了由谁进行判断以及何时判断的问题，即“不为公众所知悉”所指“公众”应如何认定？商业秘密的信息并非对于任何主体都具有价值，正如可口可乐的配方对于饮料行业的经营者具有巨大的诱惑力，但却未必对钢铁生产商也会有同样的吸引力。因此，这里价值应有特定的方向性，其指向应当限于相关行业的竞争者。这与《反不正当法解释》第9条第2款第（一）项的规定也是一致的，该条款规定：“具有下列情形之一的，可以认定有关信息为公众所知悉：（一）该信息为其所属技术或经济领域的人的一般常识或者行业惯例；”这里的技术或经济领域显然也是分别针对专门从事技术信息和经营信息相关工作人员而言的。

此外，《反不正当法解释》还对其他认定为公众所知悉的信息进行了罗列：“（二）该信息仅涉及产品的尺寸、结构、材料、部件的简单组合等内容；（三）该信息应经在公开出版物或者其他媒体上公开披露；（四）该信息已经在公开的报告会、展览等方式公开；（五）该信息从其他公开渠道可以获得；（六）该信息无需付出一定的代价而容易获得。” 但商业秘密的秘密性与商业秘密的合理利用也并不矛盾，如企业内部涉密岗位员工、商业合作伙伴以及其他主体的合法知悉并不影响秘密性的丧失。  

2、关于价值性——竞争优势的认定

商业秘密的价值性决定了商业秘密的财产属性。商业秘密作为一项智力产品，它的形成必然伴随着相应的投入和付出，它是创造者手与脑劳动的结晶，蕴含着必要的社会劳动价值，因此，它与有形的产品一样，能够成为财产的标的。[8]当然，也并非所有在信息创造过程中的投入和付出都是有效的，商业秘密的价值性判断不能仅限于对投入与付出的考量，而应从对信息的持有者是否可以确立竞争优势来进行判断。我们对商业秘密价值性这一构成要件的认识经历了从一个模糊到清晰的过程，即：从“能为权利人带来经济利益”+“实用性”到单一的“具有商业价值”的过程，竞争优势作为表征价值性的一种状态，经历了等同于价值型到作为判断是否具有价值性标准的过程。[9]通说认为，商业秘密的价值性，是指商业秘密通过现在的或未来的使用，能够给权利人带来现实的或潜在的经济价值，其最本质的特征是其所有人因掌握该商业秘密而具备相对于未掌握该商业秘密的竞争对手的竞争优势。[10]

因此，企业在对相关信息进行价值性判断时，需考虑以下因素：1.企业对拥有信息的是否投入了财力和物力，这种投入既可以是作为交易的对价付出，也可以是对信息原创性的成本投入；2.拥有该信息是否可以给企业带来相应的竞争优势，这种优势并没有量的要求，既可以为巨大的经济利益和竞争优势，也可以是有限而微小的，既可以为持续性也可以是一次性。

3、关于保密性——保密保密措施的认定

秘密性开启了信息作为商业秘密认定的前提，但作为商业秘密的信息其秘密性必须是一种持续的状态，秘密性的持续就必然要有相应保密措施的存在。秘密性既然是一种相对的状态，那么为维护秘密性的保密措施也应是相对的，保密措施设置的目的不是在于从根本上杜绝商业秘密信息的泄露，而是在于商业秘密持有者对其所享有权利的明确宣示——宣示权利的不可侵性。因此，只要采取防范措施足以防止他人通过正常方式获取该商业秘密，便应认定已符合了保密性的要求。“道高一尺、魔高一丈”，只要是通过设置保密措施和保密机制来防范秘密泄露的，定然伴生保密措施被攻破和保密机制被违反的可能，不尽合理的防范措施要求所需投入的成本可能完全超越了商业秘密本身所蕴含的价值，这不符合市场经济条件下对于一个理性人的要求，也背离商业秘密保护制度设立的初衷。“我们不能要求某人或某公司采取合理的预防措施，去防止其他人去做首先不应该去做的事情”。“也许应当修建一般的栅栏和顶棚，以挡开投来的目光，但我们不能要求商业秘密的发明人提防不能预见的、不能觉察的或不能防备的现有的间谍方式。”[11]

因此，《反不正当法解释》第十一条第一款的规定也只要求“权利人为防止信息泄露所采取的与其商业价值等具体情况相适应的合理保护措施”便可“认定为《反不正当竞争法》第十条第三款规定的‘保密措施’”。同时该条第二款规定：“人民法院应当根据所涉信息载体的特性、权利人保密的意愿、保密措施的可识别程度、他人通过正当方式获得的难以程度等因素，认定权利人是否采取了保密措施。” 所以，企业在认定是否已采取保密措施时，要注意：1.主观上要有采取防止秘密泄露措施的明确意愿；2.所采取的保密措施要与信息的商业价值等具体情况相适应,应达到阻止无权知悉的第三方通过正常方式轻易获取信息的最低程度；3.保密措施应当被负有保密义务的主体所识别。当然，企业也完全可以采取一些更为严密的保护措施，但这只是自力防护的需要，并非认定商业秘密的法定要件，而且在当下就商业秘密被侵犯的整体救济程度较低和救济成本较高的情况下，企业也完全有必要在事实的防护上做多一些的投入。

（三）商业秘密与秘密信息

商业秘密和秘密信息作为企业经营管理过程中所涉及的两类重要信息，对于企业的正常经营和发展都至为重要，由于两者都是以一定的秘密状态存在的，因此很容易被企业所混淆，从而导致企业在具体的管理过程中可能采取错误的防护措施和应对策略，进而造成企业不必要的投入和损失，基于上文对商业秘密的分析，两者的区别应当很好判断。

从广义上说，秘密信息与商业秘密两者是一种包含与被包含的关系，商业秘密必然是一种秘密信息，但秘密信息并非都能成为商业秘密（为便于对商业秘密和秘密信息进行区分，下文所指的秘密信息仅指除商业秘密之外的秘密信息）。

首先，商业秘密相对于秘密信息，其有着更为严格的认定标准，必须经受上文所述的秘密性、价值性、保密性等“三性”的检验，秘密信息无此要求。商业秘密是一种客观存在，不因企业管理者主观的认知而改变他的法律形态，而秘密信息只要企业管理者不希望该信息让外界知晓，并且采取了一定保密措施维持其秘密状态就是秘密信息，取决于企业管理者的主观需要；其次，商业秘密是作为一项知识产权的客体，他是企业一项无形资产，可作为公司设立时的一种资本形态进行出资[12]，秘密信息不具有资产属性，其可以是一项减损企业价值的负面信息甚至是违法信息，如三鹿集团在奶粉中掺杂三聚氰胺这一情况其管理者尽管是作为秘密信息管理，但该信息不仅本身不具有任何的正面价值，更是是一个负面的毁灭性信息；再次，从法律的保护强度上看，商业秘密除企业进行自力保护之外，国家通过《反不正当竞争法》等相关法律法规予以国家强力保护，对商业秘密的侵犯行为本身具有违法性并需承担相应的侵权责任、甚至刑事责任，而秘密信息则只能由信息的持有者进行自力保护，他人一旦获取、泄露并不需要承担法定责任，或者至多经由协议约定由合同法来进行调整，其所承担的一种违约责任或缔约过失责任[13]，而且有些涉及违法的秘密信息法律甚至鼓励他人进行获取并予披露，两者法律地位不可同日而语。

因此，企业在进行商业秘密的保护机制的设置时，应先以商业秘密的构成要件对相关信息进行判别，从而有针对性的制定相应保护策略，并采取恰当的保护措施。对于商业秘密，既要考虑其在管理过程中的自力防护需要，也要考虑其作为一项知识产权认定的法定需要，而秘密信息由于其只能作为自力防护而设置，一定程度上，反而更需要企业进行周详的考虑和更强的防护措施设置。

二、企业对商业秘密的防护机制设置

商业秘密的拥有者除非坚持仍以亲力亲为的姿态参与现代市场的竞争，否则商业秘密的绝对保护既不可能也无必要，立法层面既已为商业秘密的保护设置了最后的屏障，企业的对商业秘密防护也完全可遵循在法律的层面——商业秘密的保密性要求为基准考虑相应的保护机制的设置。[14]因此，本文也仅是从最低限度的使商业秘密信息可以达到法律意义上的商业秘密予保护而进行相应的制度设置。

（一）商业秘密的权利宣示——基于商业秘密的知识产权属性

我国在立法中对商业秘密保护采合同法、劳动合同法以及反正正当竞争法等多部们法律的调整也多少预示着者其争议的法律地位，好在商业秘密作为一项重要知识产权的客体现已逐渐成为一种共识。[15]但由于商业秘密其固有的秘密性特征使其权利的内容只能是处于一种不公开或有限范围公开的状态之下，使得一般公众无法很好地把握其权利的具体边界，他人也不可能像商业秘密权利人一样，可以在对商业秘密进行全面审视了解之后再判断所涉信息是否为商业秘密，从而导致很多人在触及商业秘密的权利边界后而仍不自知。因此，企业若要对商业秘密进行有效保护以防止被他人侵犯，首先要做的莫过于向商业秘密的非权利人宣示商业秘密的权利属性及权属归属。

尽管商业秘密因其秘密性需要不能将其内容予公开，但并不影响其以适当方式外公示它的存在。具体对企业而言，其应将商业秘密形成有形载体并根据其重要程度进行不同秘密等级的标示，明确相关人员对企业商业秘密获悉种类和程度的权限，对存放商业秘密的办公室及其他相关保密场所的人员进出进行严格限制（包括门禁的设置及进出权限的限制）。对于那些确有必要接触商业秘密人员，在告知其应负的商业秘密保密责任后才让其了解特定的商业秘密。[16]同时建立一种日常的商业秘密宣示机制，由人力资源部门定期对不同层级员工进行企业商业秘密识别与常识培训，并做好相应的培训内容及签到记录。       

（二）商业秘密的具体防护举措——基于侵权主体的不同维度

商业秘密被侵犯定然离不开相应侵权主体，企业商业秘密的泄露或被侵犯乃至受到侵犯后无法得以有效救济也皆是源于对相应可能涉密主体管理的疏漏所导致。《反不正当竞争法》第十条确认了四种侵犯商业秘密的行为：1、以盗窃、利诱、胁迫或其他不正当手段获取权利人的商业秘密；2、披露、使用或者允许他人使用以前项手段获取权利人的商业秘密；3、违反约定或者违反权利人的要求，披露、使用或者允许他人使用其掌握的商业秘密。4、第三人明知或者应知前款所列违法行为，获取、使用或者披露他人的商业秘密。根据企业的管理能力所及程度，我们在此基础上将其区分为企业员工对商业秘密的侵犯和非企业员工对商业秘密的侵犯，企业对商业秘密的防范也应主要基于其管理能力所及范围而进行，因此，笔者对企业商业秘密保护的机制的设置也主要以对企业员工及非企业员工（企业外部主体）而分别予展开。

1、对企业员工侵犯商业秘密的防护。

相对于企业外部人员，企业员工要么本身就是商业秘密的持有者要么至少更容易和拥有更多机会获知企业的商业秘密，很多商业秘密侵权的发生也正是因为企业员工的不当或违法行为所引起，即使企业外部人员试图获取企业的商业秘密，若没有企业员工的协助，往往很难得逞。因此，该类主体也应当是企业商业秘密防护的重点。根据是否其主体持有或有权持有企业的商业秘密，笔者以涉密员工和非涉密员工分别讨论。

（1）涉密员工

涉密员工包括企业的高级管理人员及一般涉密岗位员工。由于该类员工直接知悉企业的商业秘密，根据《劳动合同法》的规定，企业在聘用该类员工时可直接设置商业秘密保密条款并作竞业限制的约定，而且保密协议的签订也是认定商业秘密性的一个重要条件[17]。

高级管理人员处于企业的顶层，企业出于运营的需要，必然要求其掌握更多的商业秘密，其本身也可能是商业秘密的管理者，由于他们的这一特殊地位，企业的商业秘密保护制度和措施设置很容易被避开或违反。因此，对于该类主体的防护企业除做好商业秘密权的宣示之外，主要还是以保密协议以及竞业限制条款予以规制。

一般涉密岗位员工分为商业秘密的创造者和商业秘密的使用者。前者主要是指企业的技术研发人员和市场情报人员，后者主要指企业技术使用人员和普通的市场销售/采购人员。对于企业技术研发人员和市场开拓人员，由于他们往往也是商业秘密最初始的持有者，其对商业秘密比其他员工有着更精确把握，加上目前立法对商业秘密权属规定并不明确，由此他们也更容易造成对企业商业秘密的侵害。虽然《专利法》《著作权法》等对职务成果的归属已作规定，部分商业秘密本身与职务发明、职务作品也存在重叠，但大量的商业秘密却并非职务发明和职务职务作品所能涵括，其权属归属也未被立法所明确调整，因此，对于这类人员首先要考虑的应是对商业秘密权属归属的明确，民事权利以自由处分为原则，企业可在劳动合同相关条款的设置中直接明确员工在职期间所创造的的商业秘密的权属为企业所有。为了尽可能的减少争议，企业还应要求其在聘用期间对每项商业秘密生成过程进行书面记录并予汇报，并对具体的商业秘密的成果作明确确认，当然，这本身也是对商业秘密权属宣示的一个应有举措。另外，在该类员工离职时，对其岗位所涉及的已知晓或可能知晓的商业秘密应予确认，并评估其对所确认的商业秘密知悉范围和程度对企业可能造成的影响，从而决定是否履行竞业限制条款。   

对于商业秘密的使用者，一般不会存在因商业秘密权属争议可能导致的纠纷，但企业在将商业秘密向其披露时，应与其确认所告知的商业秘密范围，如以邮件方式告知、签署告知文件等，并在其离职时将其对商业秘密的知悉范围再作书面确认并告知其保守商业秘密的义务与责任，同时根据其所知晓的商业秘密范围决定是否履行竞业限制条款。

（2）非涉密员工

企业往往也对此类员工规定了不具有知悉商业秘密权限，但该类员工相对于企业之外人员而言，拥有更多机会和便利接触到所在企业商业秘密，只要企业对商业秘密宣示制度进行有效实施，已足够在其一旦涉及不正当获取或披露、使用企业商业秘密时法律责任追究程序的启动。

2、对企业外部主体侵犯商业秘密的防护

（1）商业合作关系主体

企业的发展乃至没落均会涉及与其他商业伙伴的磋商与合作，在企业与其他商业合作伙伴的磋商与合作过程中信息的相互沟通与交流不可避免，必要时甚至商业秘密的批露，或是是企业主动提供或是是应合作方要求提供。根据《合同法》第43条“当事人在订立合同过程中知悉的商业秘密，无论合同是否成立，不得泄露或者不正当使用。泄露或不正当地使用该商业秘密给对方造成损失的，应当承担损害赔偿责任。”但在认定涉及的商业秘密的保密性要件时，《反不正当竞争法解释》第11条第3款规定了除要看企业与对方是否“签订保密协议”或者“提出保密要求”之外，还要看企业是否“限定涉密信息的知悉范围，只对必须知悉的相关人员告知其内容”。因此，企业在与其他企业磋商或合作过程中涉及商业秘密需要披露的，应当与对方签订保密协议或者提出保密要求，并以书面方式明确所披露信息的知悉范围及知悉人员。

（2）非商业的合作关系主体

企业与其所在地的主管部门、地方政府、中介机构等非商业接触过程中会有不得不披露商业秘密的情况，尽管我国相关法律已规定这些机构对商业秘密负有保密义务，但对这些非商业机构主体而言，对其所知晓的企业信息是否为商业秘密并非总能作出准确的判断，企业要采类似于对商业合作伙伴的注意来对所披露的商业秘密向他们进行明确提示，否则会因为肯能缺乏商业秘密的保密性要件要求，即使这些机构无意中泄露了企业的商业秘密，也很难以作为侵犯企业商业秘密予认定进行法律救济，从而给企业所造成无法挽回的损失。

（3）非合作关系的主体

非合作关系主体既可能是企业的竞争对手也可能是无关联的其他市场主体。企业的竞争对手是企业商业秘密侵害的最大威胁者，企业员工对商业秘密的侵犯也只有在企业的竞争对手那里才能转化为现实的利益，他们是企业员工侵犯商业秘密的一个主要驱动力，企业竞争对手也往往以借助于商业秘密权利人员工（或商业间谍）的行为来进行商业秘密的获取，因此，企业对竞争对手的防护首要考虑的还是从企业内部员工的商业秘密防护管理开始，防止其从企业员工处被获取商业秘密。无关联的市场主体往往不具有侵犯企业商业秘密的内生动力，因此，对于该类主体防护主要还是着力于商业秘密的权利宣示以及日常管理，防止无意间的信息泄露，即使该类主体因过错而泄露商业秘密后也能有效地进行权利的救济。

三、结语

商业秘密作为一项重要企业资产的意义在于，商业秘密的拥有者可以通过对商业秘密在事实上的垄断持有，来确保其相对于竞争对手所确立的市场竞争优势的持续。虽然商业秘密权也像专利权、商标权、著作权一样在受到侵害后法律给予了否定评价并让侵权者承担相应的法律责任，但这仅是一种权利遭侵犯后的事后救济，它不像专利、商标、作品在侵权行为被排除之后对权利的本体并不会造成任何损害，对商业秘密的损害往往不具有可修复性，因为，对商业秘密的侵害必然伴随着其秘密性的相对减弱，侵权责任的负担、侵权行为的制止并无法使权利人回复到其对商业秘密事实上的垄断。同时，商业秘密的权属本身还面临着竞争对手合法手段——独立研发或反向工程的时刻威胁。因此，企业在对商业秘密进行正确的识别后，除继续以商业秘密的方式进行保护之外，对于可专利化而又极容易遭受合法侵害的商业秘密，可考虑通过专利这一公开垄断的方式予以保护。

注释：

[1] 冯晓青：《企业知识产权管理》，中国政法大学出版社2012年版，第330页。

[2] 孔祥俊主编：《商业秘密司法保护实务》，中国法制出版社2012年版，第3页。

[3] 刘春田、郑璇玉.商业秘密的法理分析.法学家。2004年第3期，第109页

[4] 孔祥俊：《商业秘密的司法保护实务》中国法制出版社2012年版，序言中指出“trips协议使用‘未披露过的信息’这一概念指代商业秘密，并将其作为知识产权的一个独立每类加以保护­。”

[5] 孔祥俊：《商业秘密的司法保护实务》，中国法制出版社2012年版.第113页。

[6] 徐兴详、徐春成：《商业秘密的价值性要件》，《西南民族大学学报》（人文社会科学版）2012年第3期，第93页。

[7] 孔祥俊主编：《商业秘密的司法保护实务》中国法制出版社2012版.第123-127页。

[8] 冯晓青：《知识产权法哲学》.中国人民公安大学出版社2003年版.第48页

[9] 徐兴详、徐春成：《商业秘密的价值性要件》，《西南民族大学学报》（人文社会科学版）2012年第3期，第91页。

[10] 彭学龙：《从美国最新判例看客户名单商业秘密属性的认定》，《.知识产权》2013年第1期，第59页。

[11] 李明德：《杜邦公司诉克里斯托夫》，《外国法译评》2000年第3期（转引自彭学龙：《从美国最新判例看客户名单商业秘密属性的认定》，《知识产权》2013年第1期，第60页）

[12]《公司法》第27条第一款“股东可以用货币出资，也可以用实物、知识产权、土地使用权等可以用货币估价并可以依法转让的非货币财产作价出资”

[13] 张虹：《缔约磋商中保密义务的法律适用研究——以<中华人民共和国合同法>第43条为中心》,法商研究2012年第2期，第140、146页。

但这却是一种技术层面和管理学视角的探求，不再本文论述范围之内。

[15] 催明霞、彭学龙：《商业秘密的知识产权属性——兼论知识产权的性质》，《中南财经政法大学学报》2002年第4期，第87-88页。

[16] 冯晓青：《企业知识产权管理》，中国政法大学出版社2012版。

[17] 最高人民法院《关于审理不正当竞争民事案件应用法律若干问题的解释》（法释[2007]2号）第十一条第三款规定，“具有下列情形之一，在正常情况下足以防止涉密信息泄漏的，应当认定权利人采取了保密措施：（五）签订保密协议；”但笔者认为，这里的保密协议不应仅是一个笼统的保密义务设定，而应当是正对某项具体商业秘密的特别约定，或者至少是就协议所约定的保密内容是确定的。因为“采取保密措施”的目的与其说是对商业秘密防护，还不如说是在于向他人进行一项的商业秘密权利宣示。所以，即使企业与员工签署了一份笼统的保守商业秘密协议，仍应在具体的商业秘密披露过程中进行商业秘密的属性明确告知。

Author: Mao Lingjian

December 28, 2016

Abstract: Trade secrets, as an important intangible asset of enterprises, are composed of technical and operational information and are different from confidential information. Enterprises need to recognize and identify the three components of trade secrets: confidentiality, value, and confidentiality. The protection mechanism for trade secrets of enterprises should be set based on the legal level. The non disclosure of trade secret content does not hinder the declarability of trade secrets as a right. Enterprises can establish corresponding protection mechanisms based on different potential subjects of infringement of trade secrets based on the declaration of trade secret rights, in order to achieve effective protection of trade secrets of enterprises.

Keywords: Trade Secret Identification Rights Declaration Protection Mechanism

Trade secrets, as an important intangible asset of enterprises, have enormous economic and competitive value. At present, most countries and relevant international organizations have gradually established the legal protection of trade secrets [2], and even endowed them with strong protection of world rights as intellectual property [3]. However, due to the relatively abstract principles of relevant legislation and the confidentiality characteristics of trade secrets themselves, and the relatively weak awareness of trade secret protection among most domestic enterprise operators, It is not uncommon for many business operators to lose their competitive advantage when their trade secrets are violated, but they are at a loss.

Therefore, this article attempts to identify various types of information within enterprises based on the ontology of trade secrets, and then explores an effective path to protect enterprise trade secrets, in order to be helpful for enterprise operators in managing the important asset of trade secrets.

1、 Identification of Trade Secrets

Trade secrets, unlike other intangible assets of enterprises such as patents, trademarks, copyrights, etc., can be clearly disclosed through the confirmation of national public power. The confidential nature of trade secrets can only require their owners to make internal self judgments about possible trade secret information. Moreover, if trade secrets are infringed and seek judicial protection, it is often accompanied by a case by case confirmation of the right form of trade secrets themselves. Therefore, in order for enterprises to effectively protect trade secrets, they must first have a clear understanding of what "trade secrets" are and then identify which information belongs to the category of trade secrets.

（1） Definition of the concept of trade secrets

The relevant provisions on trade secrets in China are mainly found in Article 10, Paragraph 3 of the Anti Unfair Competition Law, which stipulates: "Trade secrets refer to technical and operational information that is not known to the public, can bring economic benefits to the rights holder, has practicality, and has been subject to confidentiality measures by the rights holder." Article 39 of the Trips Agreement also defines trade secrets (undisclosed information) [4] accordingly, However, the concept of trade secrets was not clearly defined. It only pointed out that trade secrets (undisclosed information) should have three constituent elements: confidentiality, commercial value, and the adoption of confidentiality measures (confidentiality or management), and clarified the subject and object of trade secrets.

Compared to the provisions on "undisclosed information" in the trips agreement, the definition of trade secrets in the Anti Unfair Competition Law also requires information to have the necessary feature of practicality, and the rest are basically consistent with the provisions of the trips agreement. However, both theoretical and practical circles now generally believe that the practicality of trade secrets is included in the element of value or can be absorbed by the element of commercial value. The Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Anti Unfair Competition Disputes Cases issued by the Supreme Court in 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the "Interpretation of the Anti Unfair Competition Law") has identified "relevant information that has real or potential commercial value and can bring competitive advantages to rights holders" as "able to bring economic benefits and practicality to rights holders" as stipulated in Article 10 (3) of the Anti Unfair Competition Law, From this, it can be seen that in judicial practice, the requirement for the component of "practicality" in the determination of trade secrets has also been de emphasized. Therefore, when identifying trade secrets, we no longer need to consider the "practicality" of trade secrets, but only need to judge whether "technical information" and "business information" possess confidentiality, value, and confidentiality.

（2） Specific identification of trade secrets

1. On Confidentiality - Determination of Not Being Known to the Public

Not being known to the public is a prerequisite for identifying trade secrets, and it is the most fundamental attribute that distinguishes trade secrets from other intellectual property objects such as patents, trademarks, works, etc. Once a trade secret loses its confidentiality and becomes publicly known, it also loses its foundation as the protection of trade secrets. Article 9 (1) of the Interpretation of the Anti Unfair Competition Law stipulates that "relevant information that is not generally known and easily accessible to relevant personnel in its field shall be deemed as' not known to the public 'as stipulated in Article 10 (3) of the Anti Unfair Competition Law. Secrecy is an objective state where a trade secret is established as a form of information that is not commonly known and easily accessible. But the confidentiality here is relative, as long as the information is not publicly known, widely known, or understood in its field or industry, the value of the information can be sustained, and the confidentiality within this limit is sufficient to maintain the value of the information itself. [7]

Although secrecy exists as an objective state, if it is to be transformed into an objective state with legal significance, it must be judged by the corresponding subject. This raises the question of who makes the judgment and when, that is, how should the "public" referred to as "not known to the public" be determined? The information of trade secrets is not of value to any subject, just as Coca Cola's formula has great allure for operators in the beverage industry, but it may not necessarily have the same appeal for steel producers. Therefore, the value here should have a specific directionality, and its direction should be limited to competitors in related industries. This is also consistent with the provisions of Article 9, Paragraph 2 (1) of the Interpretation of Anti Unfair Law, This clause stipulates: "If one of the following circumstances occurs, the relevant information can be deemed to be known to the public: (1) the information is the general knowledge or industry practice of the person in the technical or economic field to which it belongs;" The technical or economic field here is clearly also targeted at personnel specialized in technical information and business information.

In addition, The "Interpretation of Anti Unfair Law" also lists other information deemed to be publicly known: "(2) the information only involves the size, structure, materials, simple combinations of components, etc. of the product; (3) the information should be publicly disclosed in public publications or other media; (4) the information has been publicly disclosed in public reports, exhibitions, etc.; (5) the information can be obtained from other public channels; (6) This information is easily obtained without a certain cost However, the confidentiality of trade secrets is not contradictory to the reasonable utilization of trade secrets. For example, the legitimate knowledge of employees, business partners, and other entities involved in confidential positions within the enterprise does not affect the loss of confidentiality.

2. On the Recognition of Value - Competitive Advantage

The value of trade secrets determines their property attributes. As an intellectual product, the formation of trade secrets is inevitably accompanied by corresponding investment and effort. It is the crystallization of the creator's hand and brain labor, containing necessary social labor value. Therefore, like tangible products, it can become the subject of property. [8] Of course, not all inputs and outputs in the process of information creation are effective. The value judgment of trade secrets should not be limited to the consideration of inputs and outputs, but should be based on whether the information holder can establish a competitive advantage. Our understanding of the value of trade secrets as a constituent element has gone through a process from ambiguity to clarity, from "being able to bring economic benefits to the rights holder"+"practicality" to a single "having commercial value" process. Competitive advantage, as a state of representing value, has gone through a process from being equivalent to value type to being a standard for judging whether it has value. [9] It is generally believed that the value of a trade secret refers to its ability to bring real or potential economic value to the rights holder through its current or future use. Its most essential feature is that its owner has a competitive advantage over competitors who do not possess the trade secret due to its possession. [10]

Therefore, when evaluating the value of relevant information, enterprises need to consider the following factors: 1. Whether the enterprise has invested financial and material resources in the possession of the information, which can be either a consideration for the transaction or a cost investment for the originality of the information; 2. Whether possessing this information can bring a corresponding competitive advantage to the enterprise, there is no quantitative requirement for this advantage. It can be either a huge economic benefit and competitive advantage, or a limited and small one, which can be sustained or one-time.

3. On Confidentiality - Determination of Confidentiality Measures

Confidentiality opens up the premise for information to be recognized as a trade secret, but the confidentiality of information as a trade secret must be a continuous state, and the continuity of confidentiality requires the existence of corresponding confidentiality measures. Since confidentiality is a relative state, the confidentiality measures to maintain confidentiality should also be relative. The purpose of setting confidentiality measures is not to fundamentally prevent the leakage of trade secret information, but to ensure the clear declaration of the rights enjoyed by the trade secret holder - the inviolability of the declared rights. Therefore, as long as preventive measures are taken to prevent others from obtaining the trade secret through normal means, it should be deemed that the confidentiality requirements have been met. As long as secrets are prevented from leaking by setting up confidentiality measures and mechanisms, there is a possibility of breaching confidentiality measures and violating confidentiality mechanisms. The cost of investing in unreasonable prevention measures may completely exceed the value inherent in trade secrets, which does not meet the requirements of a rational person under market economy conditions, It also deviates from the original intention of establishing a trade secret protection system. We cannot demand that someone or a company take reasonable preventive measures to prevent others from doing things that should not be done in the first place. Perhaps general fences and ceilings should be built to ward off incoming gaze, but we cannot demand that inventors of trade secrets be wary of unforeseeable, imperceptible, or unprepared existing espionage methods

Therefore, the provisions of Article 11 (1) of the Interpretation of the Anti Unfair Competition Law only require that "reasonable protective measures taken by the right holder to prevent information leakage that are appropriate to their commercial value and other specific circumstances" can be recognized as "confidentiality measures" stipulated in Article 10 (3) of the Anti Unfair Competition Law. At the same time, the second paragraph of this article stipulates: "The people's court shall determine whether the right holder has taken confidentiality measures based on factors such as the characteristics of the information carrier involved, the willingness of the right holder to keep confidential, the identifiable degree of confidentiality measures, and the difficulty of others obtaining them through legitimate means." Therefore, when determining whether the enterprise has taken confidentiality measures, it should pay attention to: 1. Subjectively, there should be a clear willingness to take measures to prevent secret leakage; 2. The confidentiality measures taken should be adapted to the specific circumstances such as the commercial value of the information, and should reach the minimum level of preventing unauthorized third parties from easily obtaining the information through normal means; 3. Confidentiality measures should be identified by the subject with confidentiality obligations. Of course, enterprises can also take more stringent protective measures, but this is only a need for self-protection, not a legal requirement for identifying trade secrets. Moreover, in the current situation where the overall level of relief for infringement of trade secrets is low and the cost of relief is high, it is entirely necessary for enterprises to invest more in factual protection.

（3） Trade secrets and confidential information

Trade secrets and confidential information, as two important types of information involved in the operation and management process of enterprises, are crucial for the normal operation and development of enterprises. As both exist in a certain state of secrecy, they are easily confused by enterprises, which may lead to incorrect protective measures and response strategies taken by enterprises in the specific management process, resulting in unnecessary investment and losses for enterprises, Based on the analysis of trade secrets mentioned above, the difference between the two should be well judged.

In a broad sense, secret information and trade secrets are a relationship of inclusion and inclusion. Trade secrets are necessarily a type of secret information, but not all secret information can become trade secrets (for the purpose of distinguishing between trade secrets and secret information, the secret information referred to in the following text only refers to secret information other than trade secrets).

Firstly, compared to confidential information, trade secrets have stricter identification standards and must undergo the "three qualities" of confidentiality, value, and confidentiality mentioned above. Confidential information does not have this requirement. Trade secrets are an objective existence that does not change their legal form due to the subjective perception of enterprise managers. Secret information is classified as confidential information as long as the enterprise managers do not want the information to be known to the outside world and take certain confidentiality measures to maintain its confidential status, depending on the subjective needs of the enterprise managers; Secondly, trade secrets are the object of intellectual property rights, and they are an intangible asset of the enterprise that can be invested as a form of capital when the company is established [12]. Confidential information does not have asset attributes, but can be negative or even illegal information that impairs the value of the enterprise. For example, in the case of Sanlu Group mixing melamine in milk powder, although its managers manage it as confidential information, But this information not only does not have any positive value in itself, but is also a negative and destructive information; Once again, from the perspective of legal protection intensity, in addition to independent protection by enterprises, trade secrets are strongly protected by the state through relevant laws and regulations such as the Anti Unfair Competition Law. The infringement of trade secrets itself is illegal and requires corresponding infringement liability, even criminal responsibility. However, confidential information can only be protected by the holder of the information on their own, and once obtained by others Leakage does not require legal liability, or at most it can be adjusted by contract law through agreement. It is a breach of contract liability or contracting fault liability [13], and some confidential information involving illegal activities is even encouraged to be obtained and disclosed by law. The legal status of the two cannot be compared.

Therefore, when setting up a protection mechanism for trade secrets, enterprises should first distinguish the relevant information based on the constituent elements of trade secrets, so as to formulate corresponding protection strategies and take appropriate protection measures. For trade secrets, it is necessary to consider both their self-protection needs in the management process and their legal need for intellectual property recognition. However, since confidential information can only be set up as self-protection, to some extent, it requires more detailed consideration and stronger protective measures by enterprises.

2、 Establishment of protection mechanisms for trade secrets by enterprises

Unless the owner of trade secrets insists on participating in modern market competition with a hands-on attitude, absolute protection of trade secrets is neither possible nor necessary. The legislative level has already set the final barrier for the protection of trade secrets, and the protection of trade secrets by enterprises can also be considered based on the confidentiality requirements of trade secrets at the legal level. [14] Therefore, this article only sets up corresponding systems to ensure that trade secret information can achieve legal protection of trade secrets to the minimum extent possible.

（1） Declaration of Trade Secret Rights - Based on Intellectual Property Properties of Trade Secrets

The adjustment of various laws such as the Contract Law, the Labor Contract Law, and the Fair Competition Law in China's legislation for the protection of trade secrets also indicates its controversial legal status. Fortunately, as an important embodiment of intellectual property rights, trade secrets have gradually become a common understanding. [15] However, due to the inherent confidentiality characteristics of trade secrets, the content of their rights can only be in a state of non disclosure or limited scope disclosure, making it difficult for the general public to grasp the specific boundaries of their rights, and others cannot, like trade secret rights holders, judge whether the information involved is a trade secret after a comprehensive examination and understanding of the trade secret, As a result, many people are still unaware of the boundaries of trade secrets even after they reach them. Therefore, if enterprises want to effectively protect trade secrets to prevent infringement by others, the first thing they need to do is to declare the right attributes and ownership of trade secrets to non rights holders of trade secrets.

Although trade secrets cannot be made public due to their confidentiality, it does not affect their existence to be publicly disclosed in an appropriate manner. Specifically, for enterprises, they should form tangible carriers of trade secrets and label them with different levels of confidentiality based on their importance, clarify the authority of relevant personnel to know the types and degrees of enterprise trade secrets, and strictly restrict the entry and exit of personnel in offices and other related confidential places where trade secrets are stored (including the setting of access control and restrictions on entry and exit permissions). For those who truly need to have access to trade secrets, only after informing them of their trade secret confidentiality responsibilities can they be made aware of specific trade secrets. [16] At the same time, establish a daily mechanism for publicizing trade secrets, and the human resources department regularly conducts enterprise trade secret identification and common sense training for employees at different levels, and keeps corresponding training content and attendance records.

（2） Specific Protection Measures for Trade Secrets - Based on Different Dimensions of Infringement Subjects

The infringement of trade secrets cannot be separated from the corresponding infringing parties, and the leakage or infringement of enterprise trade secrets, as well as the inability to provide effective relief after infringement, are all caused by negligence in the management of the corresponding potentially confidential parties. Article 10 of the Anti Unfair Competition Law recognizes four types of infringement of trade secrets: 1. Obtaining trade secrets from rights holders through theft, inducement, coercion, or other unfair means; 2. Disclose, use or allow others to use the aforementioned means to obtain the trade secrets of the rights holder; 3. Disclose, use, or allow others to use the trade secrets they hold in violation of the agreement or the requirements of the rights holder. 4. The third party obtains, uses, or discloses the trade secrets of others, knowing or should be aware of the illegal acts listed in the preceding paragraph. Based on the extent of a company's management capabilities, we differentiate it into infringement of trade secrets by employees and infringement of trade secrets by non employees. The prevention of trade secrets by companies should also be mainly based on the scope of their management capabilities. Therefore, the author mainly sets up mechanisms for protecting trade secrets by targeting employees and non employees (external entities of the company) separately.

1. Protection against infringement of trade secrets by enterprise employees.

Compared to external personnel of the enterprise, employees are either the holders of trade secrets themselves or at least have more opportunities and opportunities to learn about the company's trade secrets. Many cases of trade secret infringement are also caused by improper or illegal behavior of employees, which makes external personnel attempt to obtain the company's trade secrets. Without the assistance of employees, it is often difficult to succeed. Therefore, such entities should also be the focus of enterprise trade secret protection. Based on whether the subject holds or has the right to hold business secrets of the enterprise, the author will discuss them separately as classified employees and non classified employees.

(1) Classified employees

Classified employees include senior management personnel of the enterprise and employees in general classified positions. Due to the fact that such employees are directly aware of the company's trade secrets, according to the provisions of the Labor Contract Law, enterprises can directly establish trade secret confidentiality clauses and make non compete agreements when hiring such employees. Moreover, the signing of confidentiality agreements is also an important condition for determining the confidentiality of trade secrets [17].

Senior management personnel are at the top of the enterprise, and due to operational needs, they are inevitably required to master more trade secrets. They may also be managers of trade secrets themselves. Due to their special status, the enterprise's trade secret protection system and measures are easily avoided or violated. Therefore, in addition to declaring the right to trade secrets, the protective enterprises of such entities are mainly regulated by confidentiality agreements and non compete clauses.

Generally, employees in classified positions are divided into creators of trade secrets and users of trade secrets. The former mainly refers to the technical research and development personnel and market intelligence personnel of enterprises, while the latter mainly refers to the technical users and ordinary market sales/procurement personnel of enterprises. For enterprise technology research and development personnel and market development personnel, as they are often the initial holders of trade secrets, they have a more accurate grasp of trade secrets than other employees. In addition, the current legislation on the ownership of trade secrets is not clear, which makes them more likely to cause infringement on enterprise trade secrets. Although provisions have been made in the Patent Law, Copyright Law, and other laws regarding the ownership of job achievements, and some trade secrets themselves overlap with job inventions and job works, a large number of trade secrets are not covered by job inventions and job works, and their ownership has not been clearly adjusted by legislation. Therefore, for such personnel, the first consideration should be to clarify the ownership of trade secrets, Civil rights are based on the principle of free disposal, and enterprises can directly specify in the relevant provisions of labor contracts that the ownership of trade secrets created by employees during their tenure belongs to the enterprise. In order to minimize disputes as much as possible, enterprises should also require written records and reports of each trade secret generation process during the employment period, and clearly confirm the results of specific trade secrets. Of course, this is also a necessary measure to declare the ownership of trade secrets. In addition, when such employees resign, they should confirm the trade secrets that they know or may know about their positions, and evaluate the potential impact of their knowledge of the confirmed trade secrets on the enterprise, in order to decide whether to comply with the non compete clause.

For users of trade secrets, there are generally no disputes that may arise due to disputes over the ownership of trade secrets. However, when enterprises disclose trade secrets to them, they should confirm the scope of the trade secrets they are informed of, such as by email, signing notification documents, etc., and confirm their knowledge of the trade secrets in writing upon resignation, informing them of their obligations and responsibilities to keep trade secrets confidential, At the same time, it is determined whether to comply with the non compete clause based on the scope of trade secrets it knows.

(2) Non classified employees

Enterprises often stipulate that such employees do not have the authority to know trade secrets. However, compared to personnel outside the enterprise, such employees have more opportunities and convenience to access the trade secrets of their own enterprise. As long as the enterprise effectively implements the trade secret disclosure system, it is sufficient to initiate legal liability proceedings in the event of improper acquisition, disclosure, or use of enterprise trade secrets.

2. Protection against infringement of trade secrets by external entities of enterprises

(1) Business partner

The development and even decline of enterprises will involve consultation and cooperation with other business partners. In the process of consultation and cooperation between enterprises and other business partners, mutual communication and exchange of information are inevitable. When necessary, even the disclosure of trade secrets may be provided voluntarily by enterprises or at the request of partners. According to Article 43 of the Contract Law, "The parties shall not disclose or improperly use the trade secrets that they became aware of during the process of concluding the contract, regardless of whether the contract is established or not. If the disclosure or improper use of the trade secrets causes losses to the other party, they shall be liable for damages." However, when determining the confidentiality requirements of the trade secrets involved, Article 11 (3) of the Interpretation of the Anti Unfair Competition Law stipulates that in addition to whether the enterprise and the other party have "signed a confidentiality agreement" or "proposed confidentiality requirements", it also depends on whether the enterprise "limits the scope of knowledge of confidential information and only informs relevant personnel who must be aware of it". Therefore, if a company needs to disclose trade secrets during negotiations or cooperation with other companies, it should sign a confidentiality agreement or propose confidentiality requirements with the other party, and clarify in writing the scope of knowledge and personnel of the disclosed information.

(2) Non commercial partners

In the process of non commercial contact between enterprises and their local authorities, local governments, intermediaries, and other non commercial entities, there may be situations where they have to disclose trade secrets. Although relevant laws in China have stipulated that these entities have confidentiality obligations for trade secrets, it is not always possible to make accurate judgments about whether the enterprise information they know is a trade secret for these non commercial entities, Enterprises should adopt a similar approach to paying attention to their business partners to clearly remind them of the disclosed trade secrets. Otherwise, due to the lack of confidentiality requirements for trade secrets, even if these institutions unintentionally disclose the company's trade secrets, it is difficult to identify them as infringing on the company's trade secrets and provide legal remedies, resulting in irreparable losses for the enterprise.

(3) Non cooperative entities

Non cooperative entities may be either competitors of the enterprise or unrelated market entities. The competitors of enterprises are the biggest threat to the infringement of trade secrets, and the infringement of trade secrets by enterprise employees can only be transformed into real benefits from the competitors. They are a main driving force for enterprise employees to infringe on trade secrets, and enterprise competitors often obtain trade secrets through the actions of employees (or business spies) who have the right to trade secrets. Therefore, The primary consideration for enterprises to protect their competitors is to start with the protection and management of trade secrets for internal employees, in order to prevent them from being obtained from the company's employees. Unrelated market entities often do not have the endogenous power to infringe on enterprise trade secrets. Therefore, the protection of such entities mainly focuses on the right declaration and daily management of trade secrets, to prevent unintentional information leakage. Even if such entities leak trade secrets due to fault, they can effectively provide remedies for their rights.

3、 Conclusion

The significance of trade secrets as an important enterprise asset lies in the fact that the owner of trade secrets can ensure the continuity of their market competitive advantage compared to competitors by monopolizing the trade secrets in fact. Although trade secret rights, like patent rights, trademark rights, and copyrights, are subject to negative evaluation and corresponding legal liability by the law after infringement, they are only a form of post infringement relief. Unlike patents, trademarks, and works that do not cause any damage to the essence of the right after the infringement is excluded, the damage to trade secrets is often not repairable, because, The infringement of trade secrets is inevitably accompanied by a relative weakening of their confidentiality, and the burden of infringement liability and the cessation of infringement cannot restore the rights holder to their de facto monopoly on trade secrets. At the same time, the ownership of trade secrets itself also faces the constant threat of legitimate means from competitors - independent research and development or reverse engineering. Therefore, after correctly identifying trade secrets, in addition to continuing to protect them in the form of trade secrets, enterprises can consider protecting trade secrets that are patentable but highly susceptible to legal infringement through patents, which are an open monopoly.

Comment:

[1] Feng Xiaoqing: "Enterprise Intellectual Property Management", China University of Political Science and Law Press, 2012 edition, page 330.

[2] Kong Xiangjun, editor in chief: "Practice of Judicial Protection of Trade Secrets", China Legal Publishing House, 2012 edition, page 3.

[3] Liu Chuntian, Zheng Xuanyu. Legal Analysis of Trade Secrets. Jurist. Issue 3, 2004, p.109

[4] Kong Xiangjun: "Judicial Protection Practice of Trade Secrets", China Legal Publishing House, 2012 edition. In the preface, it is pointed out that "the trips agreement uses the concept of 'undisclosed information' to refer to trade secrets and protects them as an independent category of intellectual property rights ­。”

[5] Kong Xiangjun: "Judicial Protection Practice of Trade Secrets", China Legal Publishing House, 2012 edition, page 113.

[6] Xu Xingxiang and Xu Chuncheng: "The Value Elements of Trade Secrets", Journal of Southwest University for Nationalities (Humanities and Social Sciences Edition), 2012, Issue 3, p. 93.

[7] Kong Xiangjun, editor in chief: "Judicial Protection Practice of Trade Secrets", China Legal Publishing House, 2012 edition, pages 123-127.

[8] Feng Xiaoqing: "Intellectual Property Law and Philosophy". China People's Public Security University Press, 2003 edition. Page 48

[9] Xu Xingxiang and Xu Chuncheng: "The Value Elements of Trade Secrets", Journal of Southwest University for Nationalities (Humanities and Social Sciences Edition), 2012, Issue 3, p. 91.

[10] Peng Xuelong: "Identification of Trade Secret Properties on Customer List Based on the Latest US Cases", Intellectual Property, 2013, Issue 1, p. 59.

[11] Li Mingde: "DuPont Company v. Christopher," Foreign Law Translation Review, 2000, Issue 3 (cited by Peng Xuelong: "Determination of the Nature of Trade Secrets on Customer Lists from the Latest US Cases," Intellectual Property, 2013, Issue 1, p. 60)

[12] Article 27, Paragraph 1 of the Company Law states that shareholders may make capital contributions in currency, as well as in tangible goods, intellectual property, land use rights, and other non monetary assets that can be valued in currency and transferred in accordance with the law

[13] Zhang Hong: "Research on the Legal Application of Confidentiality Obligations in Contract Negotiations - Centered on Article 43 of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China", Legal and Commercial Research, 2012, Issue 2, pp. 140 and 146.

But this is an exploration from a technical and management perspective, which is no longer within the scope of this article.

[15] Ji Mingxia and Peng Xuelong: "The Intellectual Property Attribute of Trade Secrets - Also on the Nature of Intellectual Property", Journal of Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, No. 4, 2002, pp. 87-88.

[16] Feng Xiaoqing: "Enterprise Intellectual Property Management", China University of Political Science and Law Press, 2012 edition.

[17] Article 11 (3) of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Civil Cases of Unfair Competition (Fa Shi [2007] No. 2) stipulates that "if one of the following circumstances is sufficient to prevent the leakage of confidential information under normal circumstances, the right holder shall be deemed to have taken confidentiality measures: (5) sign a confidentiality agreement;" However, the author believes that the confidentiality agreement here should not be just a general confidentiality obligation setting, And it should be a special agreement regarding a specific trade secret, or at least the confidentiality content agreed upon in the agreement is determined. Because the purpose of "taking confidentiality measures" is not so much to protect trade secrets as to declare a trade secret right to others. Therefore, even if the enterprise and employees have signed a general agreement to protect trade secrets, the nature of trade secrets should still be clearly disclosed during the specific process of trade secret disclosure.